|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 1, 2004 14:40:42 GMT -5
I do not contest the growth of man due to medicine in the last 100 years. I dont not contest the conforming ability of bacteria and virus'. I dont believe dinosaurs were here millions of years ago. As crazy as i might sound i believe dinosaurs and man lived together. They were called dragons Here is a few pictures i know youll prolly think im crazy just check it out for yourself.http://drdino.com/QandA/index.jsp?varFolder=DinosaursAndFossils&varPage=PicturesofDinosaursinthe20thCentury.jsp And man has been man its whole existanse. The story of David and Goliath Scholars believe Goliath was a Giant about 8 or 9 feet tall. They say he is from a whole race of giants.
|
|
T Coates
Full Member
Connecticut
Posts: 25
|
Post by T Coates on Dec 1, 2004 18:43:32 GMT -5
and if homosexuality is forbiden what about incest? we couldn't have procreated if not for incest so, I guess we're all going to hell, that is if you believe that nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by simon on Dec 1, 2004 19:20:52 GMT -5
The effects of health improving medicines and vaccines (external elements) administered to parents causing gradually larger offspring on average in a continual successive chain is by definition evolution, “evolution is decent with change ”.
I have no concerns with the concept that there may very well be creatures that are virtually unchanged from prehistoric times still existing today somewhere, in some fashion. Creatures that have thought to have been extinct for 80 million years have been found alive and well inside of the last 100 years, the world’s oceans are as yet very poorly documented. However it goes against all logic that humans and dinosaurs ever coexisted, dinosaurs died out about 65 million years ago and early hominids have only been around about 3.6 million years. If you are accurate then humans would have been a potential food source for dinosaurs and it would stand to reason that human remains would have been found in conjunction with dinosaur remains but that has not happened. Early human pictographs show human interaction not with dinosaurs but with prehistoric mammals, yet there is nothing to support the existence of these vast array of creatures within the bible, though the bible does show a great deal of interaction between man and modern animals which more logically fits the evolutionary timeline.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 1, 2004 23:12:54 GMT -5
This is a qoute from a doctor who studies this
"Many animals have adapted to the slow increase in salinity over the last 4400 years. We now have fresh water crocodiles and salt water crocodiles that are different species but probably had a common ancestor. This is not evolution. It is only variation. Changing from a fresh water croc to a salt-water croc is not a major change compared to what the evolutionists believe. They think it changed from a rock to a croc! That would be a major change!
Several years ago, a man in Minnesota told me that he had two large aquariums in his house, one fresh water and the other salt water. He wondered if he could mix the fish together so he figured out how to slowly raise the salt content in the fresh water aquarium a little each week for 10 years until it was 1.8% salt. At the same time, he was lowering the salt content in the salt water aquarium to 1.8% salt. After 10 years he mixed all the fish together. He told me they adapted fine."
Dr. Kent Hovind will be speaking in Canoga Park, CA on 12/05/2004
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 1, 2004 23:22:57 GMT -5
as far as the million years ago thing i dont believe that either. according to the bible the earth has only been here for @6000 years How do you explain fossils? Here are some pictures of both recent and old petrified objects drdino.com/QandA/index.jsp?varFolder=DinosaursAndFossils&varPage=ProofofRapidPetrification.jspAll the answers to that are in the flood of noah. why dont we see as much fossils of humans as we do animals? if humans have been here for 3.6 million years?
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 1, 2004 23:24:01 GMT -5
another qoute from the doctor
"In the last 400 years there has been a great increase in accumulated technology. This is not the same as wisdom or intelligence. We can have a computer because thousands of men before have invented various parts and ideas that can be put together. There is no evidence that modern man is smarter than ancient man. I think the opposite is true. Many of the ancient structures indicate greater intelligence in solving problems in a low-tech age.
As for man getting bigger, there has been an increase in average size over the last few hundred years in industrialized countries due to improved diet, sanitation, medicine, etc but this is not to be confused with evolution. Also the trend in bigger people is not proof of long-term growth patterns. If man today is say 8 inches taller than average man during the American Revolution 200 years ago it, obviously, would not prove that man was 80 inches shorter 2000 years ago or 800 inches shorter 20,000 years ago! Every age has seen both tall people and smart people. There is no evidence that modern man is any better."
I qoute a doctor naturally cuz he is smarter than me ;D
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 1, 2004 23:39:13 GMT -5
Tom Coates,
Where did cain find his wife?
The reason that the answer to this question is not immediately apparent is that we have all been trained to think like evolutionists. Evolution was founded on a principle of modern geology called uniformitarianism. This is the belief that small changes over vast periods of time caused the massive geologic (and later Darwin added biological) changes we see around us. In essence, we are trained to believe that everything has always pretty much operated as we see it today. However, this is not what the Bible teaches.
The Bible teaches that mankind was created perfect, without flaws. It was only after man's disobedience that imperfection entered God's creation. Thus mankind, as originally created, would not have had the myriad of genetic mistakes now present on our DNA. In opposition to what evolution teaches, mutations or mistakes on our DNA, do not lead to better and improved humans. These mistakes cause hundreds of debilitating illnesses and birth defects. The reason all of us are not born with enormous numbers of medical problems is because our genes are a combination of the characteristics of both our parents. It is only when both parents have the same mistake in their genes that their children manifest the resulting genetic problem.
Furthermore, these genetic mistakes accumulate and increase with time. In other words, the information on our DNA gets more garbled - it never increases in clarity. Since mistakes are accumulating on our DNA, it is logical to assume that as we go back in time there would be less mistakes. The reason brothers and sisters cannot marry today is because they are likely to have similar DNA errors leading to children with birth defects. However, there were no moral laws against children intermarrying until after the time of Moses (approximately 4000 years ago). Before that time it was quite common.
The Bible states that Adam and Eve had MANY sons and daughters. Cain merely married his sister.
The reason we don't realize this obvious answer is because we have been trained to believe things have always been the way they are today. The current world becomes far more understandable as we view it through a Biblical perspective, which acknowledges that the past, has at times, been very different than the present.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 1, 2004 23:45:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by enginterzi on Dec 2, 2004 8:06:23 GMT -5
original languages never been greek.forget about it.Jesus never taught in greek.but what you hold s greek,ther new testament that you have is greek but Jesus never preached in greek.lets talk only truth.
|
|
|
Post by CHRISTIAN BINNIE on Dec 2, 2004 11:08:16 GMT -5
Ryan said:" I don't believe dinosaurs were here millions of years ago. As crazy as I might sound I believe dinosaurs and man lived together ". " They were called dragons". Then he puts up a webpage with a "monster " in lake Champlain. And a pic of a carcass that was 96% shark protein.BUT was cut up by people so, it " must "be, " might " be a monster! I guess 96% of shark protein doesn't could. The other 4% means it MUST be monster.UGH And there are bigfoot, yetis, and nessie ( Loch Ness monster ) too....... NOT EVERYTHING ON THE INTERNET IS TRUTHFUL!!!!!!!! NO DINOSAURS? ? They were Dragons living among men? ??AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!! BTW Goliath was NOT 8-9 feet tall for another human race!!!!!!!WHen people back then were on the over of 5and 1/2 feet tall, some one 6' 10" would look like a giant. Wasn't it said somewhere on the off topic forum that the "stories" in the book written by made INSPIRED by "god", were STORIES to get the message across to the less educated? WELL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BTW: same thing told to me in CATHOLIC high school by the Priests and Nuns. Stories and " miracles " in the book written by man INPIRED by "god " were told to get the message across to the less educated! You really got to research better. AND NOT ON THE INTERNET!!!!!!!!!! Keep qouting from that fictional book, written by man INSPIRED by " god ", at least some on this board will believe what you are saying. Like I tried to say before, YOU HAVE TO GET OUT OF LA MORE!!!!.....Good luck!!!! To Tony: 18 years old and wanting to bringback the " old school days " with the Mutant Ninja Turtles: AND I MEAN THIS WITH ABSOLUTELY NO DISRESPECT BUT: YOU ARE 18!!!!!!!!!!!! 18!!!!!!!! I have underwear older then you!!!!!!!!! OLD SCHOOL!!! YOU NOT EVEN OUT OF SCHOOL YET!!!!!! You MIGHT be JUST out of high school.... YIPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE....LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL Here is a good one for you guys: a 17 year old KIDDY in my gym the other day, saying how he used to armwrestle WAY BACK IN THE DAY in school. I wanted to punch him in the face SO bad...His mommy still wipes his ass, AND he is going to make a statement like that...
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 2, 2004 11:57:36 GMT -5
I guess the bone structure had absolutly nothing to do with it not being a shark?
Read it again a lil more carefully Dr.
does it really look like a shark to you?
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 2, 2004 12:02:47 GMT -5
I dont know if ever said jesus taught in greek. Some of the books were written in greek the new testament.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Dec 2, 2004 12:05:26 GMT -5
GUYS TO MAKE ONE THING CLEAR.
So you dont think i am any crazier than you already think i am. This is simply a theory that has more evidence than what evolutionists believe im not saying all this as absolute fact. Just another way to look at it. I for one believe it. Why? becuase of the evidence.
|
|
|
Post by CHRISTIAN BINNIE on Dec 2, 2004 12:34:44 GMT -5
DR HEH? I don't see a bone structure. i don't know what it is. Says it was dead for a couple of weeks. HOW DO THEY KNOW? DEAD IN WATER. Dead sea creatures DO get eaten by others, and rot in water. NAd won't look like its supposed to Have you ever seen a human pulled out of water that has been in water for a long period of time?
Again your quoting from a website by a CREATURE SCIENCE EVANGELIST!
Boy he will be objective...WAKE UP!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by simon on Dec 2, 2004 12:39:50 GMT -5
Ryan you have already admitted that humans have successively improved over the last 100 years and that is undeniably evolution, if humans were created perfect initially but then ceased to be perfect once they began to sin then what has happened over the last 100 years? Are humans sinning less and subsequently and divinely approaching perfection again?
There is physical tangible evidence that the world is older than 6000 years old, if it is not, how do you explain the layers upon layers of fossil evidence that clearly show that there have been millions of years where various forms of life have dominated the earth absent of man, if man was there why would they not be present in the same levels of the earth? Were these creatures buried at lower levels of the earth by a supernatural power just to fool us, to test our faith? Many other religions that use the genesis myth show the world as older than 6000 years, why is Christianity the one that is accurate in your perception given that it has no more empirical evidence to assert its claim than the others do?
Dr. Hovind's $250,000 Offer Formerly $10,000 offered since 1990 ”I have a standing offer of $250,000 to anyone who can give any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.* My $250,000 offer demonstrates that the hypothesis of evolution is nothing more than a religious belief.”
How does Dr. Hovind rationalize the lack of scientific proof for evolution compared to the genesis myth and in the same paragraph refer to evolution as nothing more than a religious belief as though a religious belief is an easily dismissible position, when the genesis myth itself is nothing more than a religious belief?
Ok so let us say for the sake of argument that evolution is a religious belief, let’s compare the religious belief of evolution to the religious belief of creation. If you and I Ryan were endowed with endless financial resources to each build our case in comparison of the two religious beliefs, I would be able to bring every piece of scientific physical evidence currently in mans possession that proves evolution; fossils, geological timeline evidence, DNA, and genetic evidence, both in support of evolution and against the possibility that humans could have been created in a divine manner or could genetically prosper through generations of inbreeding. I could bring enough physical evidence to fill the state of Louisiana and what could you bring? The king James version of the bible? Other than writings by unknown authors what physical empirical evidence could you bring to support your position that the earth is only 6000 years old, humans were created by a divine entity, and all creatures that have ever lived all lived at the same time?
Ryan I could post enough writings by others out here to close this board down, that won’t get us anywhere, so please just stop posting what other people with agendas write out on the web and start thinking for yourself, how do you Ryan Thames substantiate your position and dismiss evolution? You know there are many possible theories you could investigate with far more credence than what you are currently supporting.
Versions of Theist Evolution:
A) A supernatural entity intentionally created early life with the plan to allow it to evolve into modern man and it is mans own vanity (one of the seven deadly sins) that has caused him to adopt the premise that he was created first and has always been the dominate creature in the world. This theory at least cannot be disproven by the scientific facts of evolution because it accounts for evolution.
B) A supernatural entity intentionally created early life on this planet, and only when the planet was prepared for the coming of the creature that would rule this world did the entity place his prize creation (modern man) on this planet.
C) The history of the earth shows the remains of the experiments of a supernatural entity, attempts to create an appropriate world order with various forms of creatures and early hominids failed to produce the desired result so after millions of years of experimentation modern man was placed on this earth, and even this version had at least one failure and had to be scrapped and started over, (Noah). Although this would not explain why we still exist considering current society is infinitely wicked and sinful.
To all others that might be reading this board, my friends that hold their religions and their beliefs dear I apologize as I mean you no disrespect, I very much acknowledge your right to believe as you do and I would not question your conviction one iota, however in my opinion if you are going to come on to a public forum with the intent of debating this subject I would think it appropriate to be prepared to substantiate your position or at least be open minded about what others hold dear as well.
I intentionally studied theology and many versions of human development in college because the subject of how man has come to be who he is now, fascinates me, I have read a version of the King James bible, the Tanakh, the Bhagavad-Gita, the Quaran and the compete works of the dead sea scrolls. I have had countless debates with hundreds of people on the subject of religion including catholic priests, rabbi’s, officials fairly high up in the Mormon church, as well as everyday religiously devout people, and as a note, of all of the discussions I have ever had on this subject, the most intelligent argument I have ever heard came from the least likely of people, a woman that worked for me many years ago, a former drug addict, with a 6th grade education, that at the age of 28 had 5 children and had spent 4 years in prison already; she told me that she does not believe that the bible is anything more than fiction made up by man, she does not believe in the intent or need for churches but she does believe that there is a god that is helping her to keep her life in order and that she prays to him everyday for the strength to live a quality life. Now that even I cannot argue with.
“It is an arrogant man that claims to know for a fact the intent of a god.”
|
|